Grand Rapids Press File PhotoFormer West Michigan dermatologist Robert Stokes was in court Tuesday hoping for a lighter sentence.

GRAND RAPIDS – After spending three years in prison and undergoing surgery for prostate cancer, the disgraced dermatologist Dr. Robert Stokes claimed Tuesday to have a new understanding of his patients’ fears.

“I realize now I made a lot of bad decisions and did many things wrong,” Stokes told federal Judge Gordon Quist during a mandated re-sentence of the 58-year-old.

His claims fell on deaf ears.

Quist made few changes from his original 10 1/2-year sentence of Stokes, who scared patients into believing they had precancerous moles and spots, performed unnecessary surgeries and made fraudulent billings.

“These were horrendous crimes with people being subject to surgeries for the purpose of making more money,” Quist said.

Stokes was in court, hoping for a reduced sentence after an appeals court earlier ruled Quist wrongly enhanced the 2007 sentence because he believed the patients were “vulnerable victims.” Stokes also argued he should serve less time because of his deteriorating health, particularly the prostate cancer.

The judge wasted little time in rejecting the health issue, saying Stokes received proper physician care in prison and his August surgery made him cancer-free.

During Tuesday’s hearing, prosecutors hoped testimony from two patients about how Stokes seemed to capitalize on their cancer fears would allow the judge to use the “vulnerable victim” enhancement, but Quist ruled it wasn’t enough.

Melissa Wedberg, 30, of Grand Rapids, said Stokes told her he was concerned a small spot on her breast was cancer and performed two surgeries to remove it.

“I was 26 years old and scared for my health and safety and took his advice,” she said.

Lab results showed the growth was precancerous, but Stokes also wanted to remove a spot from her foot that another doctor said was just a freckle and he asked to examine all of her skin for other problems.

Quist said he believed Stokes did use cancer fears as a “tool” to get patients to have more procedures, but it was only indirectly related to Stokes’ convictions for billing fraud. He used lower sentencing guidelines for Tuesday’s hearing, but still determined Stokes should receive near the top of a 121-month cap.

Wedberg was happy Stokes did not get a much lower sentence and said his apology did not seem sincere.

“If he’s sorry, he’s sorry he had to go back to prison,” she said. “He apologized simply because his attorney told him it might help.”

Wedberg was particularly “disgusted,” she said, over claims that Stokes and his attorneys used about his cancer and his fear it might return.

“It’s absolutely offensive that he would use that to try to get out,” she said.